The Real State of the Union

Barack Obama would have you think that our "Union" is strong, but the people know differently. That is why his approval numbers have stayed below 50% for months since 2013.  Here are some of the numbers that prove the "Union's" lack of strength.

• 9.9%: This is the real unemployment rate when the following are taken into consideration: (1) part timers unable to find full time work; (2) underemployed workers; (3) discouraged workers that have given up trying to find a job.
• The 2nd Quarter 2013: This is when Obama promised that we would see a 5% unemployment rate as his stimulus package was passed into law.  Instead, unemployment didn't hit 5% until late 2015.
• 8.3%: The current Black unemployment rate.
• 23.7%:  The rate of unemployment among Blacks ages 16 to 19.
• 2.1%: The slowest Economic Growth since World War II.
• 1989: That's how far back you have to go to find the average median household family's current income.
• 47.6 million: A record number of people in poverty.
• 27%: The percentage of Blacks in poverty; and 24% of all Hispanics in poverty.
• 10.8 Million: The number of disabled workers.  Up from 7.4 million when Obama came to office; a 44% increase.
• 20.3%: The average increase in ObamaCare premiums going into 2016.

Believe me, there are many more statistics that prove this"Union" is not strong, but the key ones listed above speak volumes.


References:

Obama Job Approval: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

The Worst [economic] Expansion Since WWII: https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Worst+Expansion+Since+World+War+II+Was+Even+Weaker+...&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 

Alternative Measures of Unemployment: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

The Employment Situation December 2015 - Bureau of Labor Statistics:  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

White House Stimulus Predictions for Unemployment: http://www.qando.net/2011/09/09/the-white-house-stimulus-chart/

Record 46.7 Million Americans Live In Poverty; Household Incomes back 1989 levels: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-16/record-467-million-americans-live-poverty-median-houshold-income-back-1989-levels

Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity: http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/

Table 2. Social Security benefits [including disability beneficiaries], November 2015:  https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/quickfacts/stat_snapshot/#table1


Average Increase in ObamaCare Premiums going into 2016: https://www.google.com/search?q=average+increas+in+obamacare+premiums+in+2016&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

pb

No Wonder Ginsburg Fell Asleep During State of the Union Speech

Ah, yes.  President Obama's 2015 State of the Union address was a real yawner.  Especially, for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

It was also a yawner for most Americans.  Only about 9-1/2 percent, of this nation's population watched this year's Obama loves Obama show.   Not since Clinton gave his last State of the Union address -- 15 years ago -- have the ratings been so low.

Low ratings for this President's rose-colored State of the Union speech aren't anything new.  Last year's address was also the lowest rated since that same Clinton speech.  But, records are always meant to be broken and Obama just couldn't wait to break his last year's record.  That's because our supposedly genius leader spent the last few weeks previewing all of his proposals that would appear in the address.  Everything from free Community College tuition, family leave, tax hikes on the rich to give middle class workers and, you name it.  Of course, since everybody knew what he would say, why watch the show?  Duh!


References:

Obama’s speech didn’t excite Ginsburg:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/post/obamas-speech-didnt-excite-ginsburg/2013/02/13/b4531d8e-75fc-11e2-aa12-e6cf1d31106b_blog.html

State of the Union television ratings drop to 15-year low:  http://www.aol.com/article/2015/01/21/state-of-the-union-television-ratings-drop-to-15-year-low/21133213/

Obama's 2014 State of the Union Hits Fourteen-Year Low in:  http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2014/01/29/obama-sotu-hits-14-year-low-in-viewership/

How the Middle Class Has Faired Under Obama

Currently, about 44% of Americans identify themselves as being in the middle class.  So, it's no wonder why annually. President Obama has pitched some kind of give-away to them in order to endear them to, and garner votes for, both him and his Democrat party.

Now, in the 2015 State of the Union Address, Obama repeated his commitment to helping the middle class.  Just as he has promised every year since before taking office.  In 2008, just a month before the election that gave him the presidency for the first time, he penned a "Rescue Plan" in which he promised, if elected, to give the middle class tax breaks and strengthen them with better jobs.  Then, after taking office in January 2009, he decided not to implement the "Rescue Plan" that he had promised just 3 months earlier.  This, despite the fact that he had majority control of both houses of Congress to pass any tax cuts that he wanted.  Instead, he created a Task Force to address the weakening middle class. Of course, and in typical fashion, the findings of the Task Force were pretty much ignored by Obama.  But, the promise of tax cuts did what it was supposed to.  Get him elected.

Clearly, without getting into all the details that are in the "References" below, the middle class has been a constant focus of this President.  And sadly, they may have voted for him on the basis of all his promises and rhetoric, and received nothing in return.  The best example of this is displayed in this graph on median family incomes since Obama took office in 2009:

Note: Office Gov't Data For 2014 Won't Be Available Until mid-2015

Simply, the American middle class is hurting because Obama has prevented the one thing that is more important to that class than all his targeted tax cuts:  Good paying jobs.  As long as American businesses are saddled with one new regulation after another,  good paying middle class jobs continue to be scarce.

References:

2015:  Obama to pitch middle-class economic plan in annual address: http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-address-pitch-tax-proposals-help-middle-class-100326731.html

2014: Despite recovery, fewer Americans identify as middle class: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/27/despite-recovery-fewer-americans-identify-as-middle-class/

2008: Barack Obama: A Rescue Plan for the Middle-Class: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/a_rescue_plan_for_the_middlecl.html

2009: Middle Class Task Force: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog_post/Todaysevent/

2009: Health Care Reform: Taxes May Hit Middle-Class - ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/health-care-reform-taxes-hit-middle-class/story?id=9090430

2010: Obama's plan to help the middle class: how it might affect you: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0125/Obama-s-plan-to-help-the-middle-class-how-it-might-affect-you

2011: Obama: "I'm A Warrior For The Middle Class": http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/22/obama_im_a_class_warrior.html

2012: Obama’s Middle Class ‘Tax Cut’ Would Raise Taxes by $1.3 Trillion Over Eight Years: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-s-middle-class-tax-cut-would-raise-taxes-13-trillion-over-eight-years

2013: Obama Focuses on Economy, Vowing to Help Middle Class: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/us/politics/obama-to-restate-economic-vision-at-knox-college.html

2014: Obama: Middle-class issues drive my agenda: http://www.marketplace.org/topics/economy/obama-middle-class-issues-drive-my-agenda

STUDY: Obama has worst record on keeping State of the Union promises: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/20/obama-has-worst-state-union-record-ford-study-show/

Poll: Poll: 72 percent of small businesses say regulations are hurting them: http://thehill.com/regulation/business/279443-poll-72-percent-of-small-businesses-say-regulations-are-hurting-

Former Obama administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Cass Sunstein: Yes, Regulation Can Kill Jobs: http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-03-04/yes-regulation-can-kill-jobs

Obama Imposed 75,000 Pages of New Regulations in 2014: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/19803-obama-imposed-75-000-pages-of-new-regulations-in-2014

Obama administration imposed $181 billion in regulations in 2014: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/06/obama-administration-passed-181-billion-in-regulations-in-2014-report-finds/

December 2014: Report: 21000 regulations so far under Obama: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-21000-regulations-so-far-under-obama-2375-set-for-2015/article/2558050

Obama's Latest Drag On American Businesses: Paid Family Leave & Sick Pay

Awhile ago, two researchers at the Brookings Institute released this very disturbing graph:

What this shows is that, for the very first time in more than thirty years, America's businesses had more defaults/closures (exits) than those being started up (entry).  Despite the recession being over in mid-2009, the adverse exit versus start up trend has not abated; and, obviously, this is one of the reasons that our job market is so soft.  While the recession can be easily blamed for the crossover in the first place, the fact that we haven't gotten back on track with higher business creations has a lot more to do with regulations under this President and the Democrats.  Regulations that have presented high hurdles for many small businesses to even get off the ground, and regulations that have also accelerated business closures.

Now, Obama wants to beat down U.S. businesses even further by pushing 6 weeks of paid family leave for both of the parents who have just had a baby or adopted a child. Additionally, he wants all employees to have 7 full days of paid sick leave.  But, just like a lot of what Obama and the Democrats have done over the last 6 years, the cost to American businesses, and ultimately you and I, will be phenomenal.

In the case of paid family leave, there are approximately 4 million babies born each year in this country.  Since half the women giving birth are unwed, this law could, worst case, give roughly 6 million parents of newborns a full six weeks of leave.  In addition, there are about 1-1/2 million adoptions each year; meaning that an additional 3 million more parents would benefit from Obama's proposed law.  But, because there are teen births and some births are to freelance workers and workers who already get paid leave, let's assume that only 6 million parents would impact businesses.   

According to the Census Bureau, the average per capita income in the U.S. is $28,155/year or $542/week.  A six week leave would then cost the average business roughly $3,250 for each person taking leave.  There's more.  Most business cannot simply cover a missing staff member for six weeks.  If they could, then they obviously don't need that person.  So, you have to double the $3,250 to take into account that a temporary worker would have to be hired to cover for the on-leave worker.  This means that each of 6 million workers on family leave would cost a business $6,500.  In total, that is a sum of $39 billion annually that businesses would have to absorb and pass on to you and I in higher costs. In the case of marginally profitable businesses, this additional expense could push them into bankruptcy.

Then, there's the paid sick leave proposal.  According to the Institute for Women's Policy Research, more than 40% of the 156 million workers in this country aren't afforded paid sick leave.  That means that at least 62 million employees would benefit from a law that mandated 7 paid sick days.  Now, having been a manager at a company who had a 7-days paid sick leave policy, I personally know a lot about this topic.  Monthly, I would receive a report reflecting how much year-to-date sick leave took place in my own department and as compared to the company as a whole.  Statistically, about 74% of employees took exactly 7 sick days a year; mostly just one day at a time and mostly on Fridays with Mondays being the second heaviest days.  Because of the Friday phenomenon, the company instituted casual and half-day Fridays and the number of reported Friday call-ins due to sickness plummeted.  So, what I am saying is that paid sick days are mostly another form of paid vacation. The abuse of which probably would best be curtailed if left unpaid.

So, here's what universal paid sick pay will cost companies.  Using the Census data on income info above, 62 million workers getting paid for 7-days sick time, will cost businesses a total of  $47 billion dollars each year.  All of which will be passed on to us.

Combined, Obama's family leave and sick pay proposed regulation will cost businesses an estimated $86 billion per year.  This, in turn, will exacerbate the decline in business creation and the rise in business closures.  A fact that is already clearly noted and obvious to anyone who drives around and sees many former storefronts and office buildings still empty from the days of the recession. 


References:

Brookings Institute: Declining Business Dynamism in the United States: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2014/05/declining%20business%20dynamism%20litan/declining_business_dynamism_hathaway_litan.pdf

Dodd Frank Banking Regulations:  Community banks, the lifeblood for small business growth, are disproportionately affected, impacting their lending ability and consequently their ability to infuse growth into the broader economy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/franksorrentino/2014/07/24/after-four-years-of-dodd-frank-bank-regulation-is-still-a-guessing-game/

Government report finds regulations have spiked under Obama: http://thehill.com/regulation/administration/299617-government-report-shows-spike-in-regulations-under-obama

Obama Plans to Push Paid Family and Sick Leave for Workers:  http://www.cnbc.com/id/102340223

CDC Fast Facts: Births and Natality: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/births.htm

Almost half of first babies in U.S. born to unwed mothers: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/almost-half-of-first-babies-in-us-born-to-unwed-mothers/

Facts about adoption: http://www.pbs.org/pov/offandrunning/adoption_fact_sheet.php

Census Bureau QuickFacts Of the United States:  http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

More than 40% of private sector workers in the U.S. currently don’t get paid sick days, according to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research: http://fox8.com/2015/01/15/obama-to-press-for-paid-sick-days-and-paid-family-leave/

The State of the Union Address and 2014 'Hottest Year' Reports

Its a miracle!  A miracle that two separate agencies of the federal government could work independently on two separate reports and manage to release both on the very same day.  But, it happened.  Both NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA) simultaneously released reports that proved that 2014 was the hottest year on earth on record.  Or, at least, the hottest in the last 130 years of record keeping.

The New York Times celebrated the event with this headline: "2014 Breaks Heat Record, Challenging Global Warming Skeptics."

Wow! This must be really something!  Well, it would be until you find out that this new hottest record was broken by only one one-hundredths of a degree.  The supposed previous record was 58.45 degrees.  The new record literally clobbered the old with a temperature of 58.46 degrees.  Of course, for political reasons, the liberal and pro-climate change initiatives, the New York Times wouldn't tell us that.  Instead, they simply reported that the record was broken.

But, there's a problem with data used in creating these reports.  Both reports are based on thousands of surface thermometer readings from all over the world.  Some are maintained and properly calibrated; and, some not. Sometimes they break and the replacement may read hotter than the old one. Many depend on a hopefully diligent human to accurately and manually record the data; every hour on the hour.  Then, that data must be again manually entered into a centralized computer database which is always subject to fat-fingered data entry errors. As the noted climatologist  Dr. Roy Spencer said in putting down the accuracy of the two reports:

'The thermometer network is made up of a patchwork of non-research quality instruments that were never made to monitor long-term temperature changes to tenths or hundredths of a degree, and the huge data voids around the world are either ignored or in-filled with fictitious data.'

These two reports also contradict the RSS or Remote Sensing System's satellite data which is certainly more accurate and which collects data automatically from places that no thermometer even exists.  Like the mountain tops, the seas, and the polar ice caps. According to Dr. Spencer, through the end of October, that data had 2014 ranked as the 7th warmest year since satellite monitoring had been initiated.  And, it is highly unlikely that the 7th warmest year standing would be upset with just 2 months more of data remaining outstanding.

It is also interesting that these two reports were released on a Friday; just 4 days ahead of Obama's State of the Union Address.  That gave it all weekend to be discussed on all the cable news stations and, on each of the Sunday news shows.  Then, the "hottest ever" is sure to be incorporated into Obama's address to the nation on Tuesday in support of his radical climate agenda.


Isn't it convenient that both NASA and NOAA report to Obama?

Update: After writing this blog entry, the UK Daily Mail reported that NASA only thinks that they are 38% right on 2014 being the hottest year.  In other words, their report might be 62% wrong.  A fact that NASA conveniently forgot to mention in their "hottest" press release.  Also a fact that the liberal media seems to be ignoring ahead of the President's State of the Union speech.

References:

NASA, NOAA Find 2014 Warmest Year in Modern Record: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2015/january/nasa-determines-2014-warmest-year-in-modern-record/

2014 Breaks Heat Record, Challenging Global Warming Skeptics: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/science/earth/2014-was-hottest-year-on-record-surpassing-2010.html

Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer: ‘Why 2014 Won’t Be the Warmest Year on Record’: http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/10/21/climatologist-dr-roy-spencer-why-2014-wont-be-the-warmest-year-on-record-we-are-arguing-over-the-significance-of-hundredths-of-a-degree/

Dr. Roy Spencer Bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_%28scientist%29

No Record Temperatures According To Satellites: http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/12/03/no-record-temperatures-according-to-satellites/

Scientists balk at ‘hottest year’ claims: Ignores Satellites showing 18 Year ‘Pause’ – ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’ – The ‘Pause’: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/01/16/scientists-balk-at-hottest-year-claims-we-are-arguing-over-the-significance-of-hundredths-of-a-degree-the-pause-continues/

Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record... but we're only 38% sure we were right: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2915061/Nasa-climate-scientists-said-2014-warmest-year-record-38-sure-right.html

Fact Checking Obama's Statement on Women and Income Inequality

While there were dozens of half-truth's and outright lies that I could have written about following the President's State of the Union address, none are more outrageous than these two minutes:

First of all, the fact that women only make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns would be an accurate statement if we were all listening to his speech in 2004.  If the President took the time to read the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report on this exact topic, he would have read the following on the very first page:

 "In 1979, women working full time earned 62 percent of what men did; in 2011, women’s earnings were 82 percent of men’s."

And, that 82 percent is up from 81 percent in the previous year.

More importantly, the 82 percent number doesn't even come close to justifying Obama's statement that women should get equal pay for equal work.  That's because it is an average of all kinds of jobs that are held by the two sexes.  For example, more men work in higher paying heavy equipment and construction jobs than women; while woman dominate in lower paying positions such as cashiers, waitresses, and housekeepers.  Often, women choose these lower paying jobs because they give them more flexibility to care for their families.  In terms of college degrees, the highest paying jobs are in engineering.  Yet, less than 20% of those holding those degrees are women.

Now in terms of income inequality, the President seems to have conveniently forgotten that "he" signed  the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law in 2009.  Along with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act in 1963, the Ledbetter law insures that woman have the right to sue whenever there is "true" income equality.  "True" meaning that the income disparity isn't as a result of differences in skill, responsibility, merit raises, or seniority.

Then there was the statement that a woman deserves to be able to have a baby without losing her job.  Well, again, Obama has forgotten that we already have a law that protects women from that, or even as a result of having to take care of a sick family member.  It's called the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.  The overview of that law is as follows:

• Twelve workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for:
• the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
• the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
• to care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition;
• a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job;
• any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is a covered military member on “covered active duty;” 

The concept of equal pay for equal work is the basis of socialism and unionization and not capitalism.  So, yes, a woman might be paid less than a male coworker because of a lack of things like education/experience, responsibility, seniority, or merit raises.  At the same time, two men, working the same job, might also be paid differently for the very same reasons.  That's why, to my knowledge, there hasn't been a slew of lawsuits being filed since the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was passed.

Once again, this President is distorting the facts in order to garner women's votes; and, he knows quite well that many woman (and, of course men, too) won't fact check all his lies.

References:

BLS Reports: Women in the Workplace: February 2013: http://www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2012.pdf

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009

Equal Pay Act of 1963: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Pay_Act_of_1963 

U.S. Department of Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act: http://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/

Engineering by the Numbers: http://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles/2011-profile-engineering-statistics.pdf

Which College Degrees Earn the Highest Wages?: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/5-best-and-worst-paying-college-degrees/

Two Different State of the Union Addresses...Two Different Minimum Wages

In the 2013 State of the Union address, Obama called for a $9/hour minimum wage:

In this year's address, he's calling for a $10.10 minimum wage; a 12% increase over last year:

It's hard to believe that a 12% increase in the President's targeted minimum wage is warranted when inflation in the last year was only 1.5%.  Also, is $10.10 realistic when he couldn't get $9 passed through Congress?  One smells another political, wedge issue being served up by Obama for this year's election!

Now, while the President cited Costco as an employer that currently pays above minimum, that might not be the case in the future.  Let's not forget that, in 2007, Circuit City had an entry level pay of $8.75 when, at the time, the minimum wage was just $6.55.  They, too, thought paying a higher wage would reduce turnover and attract a higher level of employee.  A year later, they went bankrupt; citing wage management issues in the lead up to that bankruptcy.

By the way, $10.10 is another 41% increase since 2009, and the 2009 increase was 41% over the 2007 wages at the beginning of that year.  Has any other hourly wage group seen their salary almost double in just 7 years? Have you?

Reference: Circuit City: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_City

Obama's Wish For A State Of Disunion Address

Once again, Obama launched another divisive, class warfare speech in what was supposed to be the annual State of the Union address. He talked about fairness being higher taxes on the wealthy. He talked about teamwork. Yet, is it fair and is it teamwork when almost half of all Americans pay no taxes? Is it fair that almost half of the country's high school students fail to graduate and, as a consequence, are unable to find good paying jobs. Are those people team players, Mr. Obama?

We want wealthy people in this country. We want them to use their wealth as capital to create jobs in America. We don't want to them to hand their wealth over to Washington, D.C. so that money can be squandered away in political cronyism like Solyndra.

But, this President only wants to berate the wealthy and cripple them through higher and higher taxes. What happens when those wealthy just give up and leave America? Who, then, pays for all our debt? Let's not forget that, in just 3 years, Obama is responsible for 1/3 for all the debt that this nation has accumulated in its 235 year history. Now, he thinks the wealthy -- those making more than $250,000 -- should fix the massive debt problem that he and the Democrats have created. Where's the team play when he and the Democrats put their radical priorities ahead of the health of this country. Once again, Obama's community organizing principals of disunion were quite apparent in last night's speech.

The Democratic Response To The State of the Union Speech

Last night, following the President's State of the Union Address to our country, the Democratic response was delivered by Kansas Governor, Kathleen Sebelius. In that speech, she consistently said "Work with us, Mr. President." And, to the many who listened to that speech, they thought they were hearing a plea for us all to work together to get things done. But, this was a sly deception. Missing in that plea was "we are willing to work with you, Mr. President" or "let us work together, Mr. President" to solve the problems that face this country.

The "work with us" is basically a plea for the President and the Republicans in Congress to abandon their political views and ideas and completely roll-over to the ideas of the Democrats. The "work with us" is a statement that "we" have the ideas that matter; and, not you. The "work with us" is also a statement that your views don't count. The "work with us" is a fairly self-centered and partisan viewpoint. That is what that speech truly said!

And to me, when Sebelius opened her speech with the initial words of "In this time, normally reserved for the partisan response, I hope to offer you something more...", it was just more of the same old "partisan B.S." with the balance of her speech clearly outlining that. There was no compromise offered. It was just a lot of "Work with us, Mr. President" because (not said but implied) we aren't willing to work with you!